|
|
| «Latest ‹Forward News item: 2819 Back› Oldest» |
| Council opposes cell tower; Residents raise health concerns | |
| Canada | Created: 20 Feb 2008 |
|
City council has thrown its support behind a group of residents fighting against the construction of a cellphone tower in a residential neighbourhood near Valleyview Drive. At planning committee last night, a divided council tentatively decided to tell Industry Canada - the federal department that regulates the telecommunications industry - that council doesn't want Telus Mobility to build a cellphone tower at 868 Valleyview Dr. That decision goes to the regular session of city council for final approval in two weeks. The tower could still be built even if council ratifies its decision. Industry Canada will have the final say in any dispute between Telus and the city. A representative for Telus told council the wireless communications company has heard the complaints from residents and will hold back the Valleyview Drive site until more work can be done. "We will go back to the public consultations phase and continue public consultations," said Stephen D'Agostino, a lawyer with Thomson Rogers law firm in Toronto. "Telus is a company that tries to develop things with consensus." Telus currently has applications before Industry Canada for three cellphone towers in Peterborough. There are towers planned for 42 Lansdowne St. W. and 1951 Lansdowne St. W. Coun. Jack Doris urged council to support the residents who oppose the Valleyview Drive site. "They're going to fight you to a standstill with their presentations and they're concerned about their health," Doris told the Telus representative. "Will you save everyone the pain of fighting this particular site?" D'Agostino assured council the wireless technology meets Health Canada standards and is safe. "We're all exposed to radio waves in our daily activities," he said. "There's radio in our lives all the time. "There is no evidence, no evidence by any peer reviewed study anywhere in the world ... there is no evidence that these towers cause health and safety situations." D'Agostino referred council to research presented by the Royal Society of Canada on its website, www.rsc.ca Magda Havas, a Trent University associate professor who argues against putting cellphone towers in residential areas, has pointed to research such as the bio-initiative report that can be found at www.bioinitiative.org Doris compared the concerns about wireless communications to the history of asbestos and certain chemical solvents that were once thought to be safe. "Electromagnetic emissions, there's a great variety of opinions from our learned society that says they're harmful," Doris said. Council is set to ask the Peterborough County-City Health Unit to provide information on the health effects of telecommunications. Telus may be forced to defend its selection of the Valleyview Drive site because of the vocal opposition by some residents, D'Agostino argued Other landlords won't take a tower once it becomes controversial, D'Agostino said. "They've essentially forced the carrier into a defensive position because they have nowhere to go," he said. Council asked staff to develop a protocol for how to consult with telecommunications companies about cellphone tower applications. The city can set its preference for issues such as the type of towers that are built in residential and industrial areas. Coun. Henry Clarke pointed out there are many different opinions on the effects of wireless communication. "If it's possibly dangerous to the people, then let's keep it out of the residential areas until we know more," he said. "Let's get the information from the health unit and let's exclude Valleyview." Coun. Bob Hall suggested the city may want to consider designating areas for cellphone tower construction in its secondary plans - documents that essentially serve as blueprints for growth. "This problem is not going to go away. It's going to increase," he said. "If these start popping up in residential neighbourhoods, there are going to be lots of concerns and lots of issues." City council doesn't have any say on abortion, euthanasia or wireless communications, Coun. Eric Martin said. "We're going outside the realm of what city council can and can't do," he said. "We're trying to make some points that we have no control over." Martin and councillors Shirley Eggleton, Ann Farquharson and Patti Peeters opposed the motion to tell Industry Canada that the city doesn't want a cellphone tower at the Valleyview Drive location. |
|
|
|
|
| Click here to view the source article. | |
| Source: Peterborough Examiner, BRENDAN WEDLEY, 20 Feb 2008 | |
| «Latest ‹Forward News item: 2819 Back› Oldest» |